Beyond low \(B_m\)  and high \(P_m\)  values, which are restrictive constraints on our inequalities in Eqns. (REF )–(REF ), we suggest that \(B_m \ge 4\)  is overly permissive of gaps between cells in (inter)stripes. This is based on empirical observations that zebrafish stripes are roughly 7–12 cells wide [1]}, so \(B_m \ge 4\)  means that stripes featuring gaps between adjacent cells comparable to half a stripe width pass through our methods without being flagged as broken. If we focus on \(B_m < 4\)  in Figure REF , there is a wide range of persistence thresholds under which our methods are insensitive. Choosing \(P_\text{ABM} \in [100,340]\)  and \(P_\text{CA} \in [100,260]\)  \(\mu \) m does not affect our results. (If we use different hyper-parameters for different cell types, we can consider a wider range for stripes, but we apply the same cutoff in Eqns. (REF )–(REF ).) In agreement with [2]}, we thus select \(P_\text{ABM}=P_\text{CA} = 200\)  \(\mu \) m as our baseline value. The sharp drop in ABM interstripes (Figure REF (c)) flagged as broken between \(B_\text{ABM} = 1.25\)  and \(1.5\) , followed by a fairly insensitive region, suggests that we should select \(B_\text{ABM} \in [1.5,3.75]\) . For CA patterns, the number of interstripes flagged as broken (Figure REF (d)) repeatedly drops by about half as \(B_\text{CA}\)  increases from \(1.25\)  to \(2.25\) . In the end, choosing a value for \(B_m\)  is a question of how large of a gap between adjacent cells we permit before calling an (inter)stripe broken, and we set \(B_\text{ABM} = B_\text{CA} =2.5\)  cell–cell distances as our baseline value.
<FIGURE>